Russia’s opposition abroad is tearing itself apart, but clings to hope

LONDON — They share the dream of a Russia without President Vladimir Putin, but the Russian opposition is at each other’s throats — again.

With Russia’s war against Ukraine in its third year and with no end in sight, opposition supporters say it has never been more urgent to form an effective, united front against Putin, as the number of soldiers dying on the front rises, the Kremlin imposes new taxes to fund the military and society only grows more nationalistic and repressive.

But a scandal that sparked accusations that one opposition figure orchestrated a shocking attack with a hammer on another — a claim denied publicly — shows how the splits have intensified since the death of Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny this year.

Many Russians who want to see change are increasingly doubtful that the opposition in its current form can lead the fight to transform the country.

“It is a disparate array of individuals and small groups who basically do not even pretend to be one, who do not have a vision for Russia that they share and that they would put forward,” said Maria Lipman, editor of Russia.Post and a visiting scholar at George Washington University.

Russia’s liberal oppositionhas long struggled to gain a foothold in the political system, not least because of constant infighting since its emergence in the 1990s. The environment in the country changed dramatically with the invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, however, and most political activists and opposition figures were forced into exile. Any who remained were suffocated with sweeping arrests, long prison sentences and other intimidation tactics.

The unexpected death of Navalny at an Arctic penal colony this February, which his allies say was a state-sponsored murder, dealt a catastrophic blow to Russia’s democratic hopes and left the opposition gasping and leaderless.

The release of several key opposition figures in a historic prisoner exchange in August has made little difference, andno one has emerged as a unifying figure.

Amid their intensifying squabbles, the main groups in the opposition say they are in survival mode, awaiting the almost mythical day of Putin’s departure so they can return to Russia, replace the government and undo the damage of more than two decades of Putinism.

Addressing a crowd of British lawmakers and Russian human rights activists at a recent event in London, Russian politician Vladimir Kara-Murza, a Washington Post contributor who was released this summer along with other Russian political prisoners in the swap, said that the collapse of Putin’s regime is inevitable — and when that day comes, the opposition must be ready.

“It will be my responsibility alongside my colleagues in Russian civil society to be sure that we are ready for that moment, because we can’t miss that opportunity. We cannot botch that transition. We cannot get it wrong again,” Kara-Murza said.

Many grassroots activists, though, see these high-profile figures and large groups as monopolizing influence and resources while doing little to engagethe broader community. They insist that a lot can still be achieved from exile, including working with Russians inside the country, and bridge-building with Ukrainian human rights groups and diplomatic circles.

The opposition should be focused on the present rather than a future that may not occur for another generation, they say.

“If this collapse does happen, we are going to inherit a giant, anarchic, nonsensical system — and immense chaos. We need to cover the basics first, and stop fighting with each other, before planning for this hypothetical day,” said Ksenia Maximova, founder of the Russian Democratic Society,based in London.

There has been an attempt by the main groups to build a broader consensus through a centralized antiwar committee based out of London and Berlin. But the initiative by Mikhail Khodorkovsky, a 1990s-era oil tycoon who fell afoul of Putin, was imprisoned and is now in exile as a key funder of the opposition, is strugglingamid infighting.

The current schism tearing apart the opposition is centered on accusations that an associate of Khodorkovsky orchestrated a brutal attack with a hammer against Leonid Volkov, a leader of Navalny’s Anti-Corruption Foundation, outside his home in Lithuania in March.

The foundation, known by its Russian initials, FBK, published an investigation that claimed Russian Israeli financier Leonid Nevzlin, an ally of Khodorkovsky, planned the attack.

Nevzlin wrote on X that he had nothing to do with the attack and that “justice will confirm the absurdity and complete baselessness of the accusations against me.” His representatives did not respond to requests for comment.

Khodorkovsky, along with other figures interviewed by The Post, suggested that the FBK may have fallen for a plot by the Russian security services to undermine the opposition.

“This is a present for” the Russian security services, Khodorkovsky told The Post, saying that it was absolutely implausible that Nevzlin would have left such a trail of evidence. “Regardless of whether Nevzlin is guilty or whether this is slander, in any case this is a serious blow for the opposition.”

Members of the opposition noted the Russian security services’ long-standing record of efforts to smear opposition leaders and promote rifts between the groups.

The dispute has deepened the long-running bitter conflict between Khodorkovsky’s group and members of Navalny’s team, both of which have significant influence, and robust and regular connections with Western governments.

The revelations set off a flurry of outraged Facebook essays and threads, and have prompted authorities in Lithuania and Poland to open criminal investigations into the claims. A Polish court ruled this month that the two men suspected of assaulting Volkov would be released on bail.

In a post to Facebook, Russian political scientist Kirill Rogov wrote that Putin has already defeated the Russian opposition and that they had made a fiasco of themselves.

“A completely indecent squabble of aggression and mutual insults has been going on in the well-known zone of Russian ‘opposition politicians’ for two years now,” he wrote. “Almost nothing else noticeable has happened in the Russian opposition abroad during all this time.”

Moreover, the infighting is denting the opposition’s credibility with the Western partners it is now reliant on and whose relationships will be crucial in the event of a return to Russia.

Navalny’s FBK has been singled out in particular for refusing to join with other opposition groups and being against any kind of consolidation of efforts.

“It’s impossible to speak to them, and they never give any feedback about what they are actually doing, how they are spending their funds, what is discussed during these meetings with Western heads of government,” said Maximova, the London-based activist. “They do not speak to the people they claim to represent.”

Volkov has dismissed suggestions that the FBK refuses to work with any opposition groups, and he previously called for those who oppose the Putin regime to enter into a broad and open discussion on reforms to dismantle the distortions of Putin’s autocratic rule after its collapse.

In a recent broadcast on his YouTube channel, Volkov pointed out that Navalny’s widow and successor, Yulia Navalnaya, had visited Finland with Kara-Murza and said that his team was ready to work with “individuals.”

Ilya Yashin, who built an independent career in the opposition, has also met with Navalnaya and hinted at potential collaboration. Yashin, who was released in the August swap, has been touring emerging Russian diasporas across Europe. Addressing supporters in Vilnius, Lithuania, a stronghold for exiled independent media, he said the time was not right for opposition consolidation.

“The political and personal conflicts are so severe that it is impossible to create a single structure, and there is no need to waste time on it,” he said.

Navalny’s FBK thinks it would be detrimental for the organization to dilute its existing structure because it would bring chaos to a tightly run ship that had weathered multiple attacks from the Kremlin, said a close friend of Navalny’s who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive matters.

Volkov told The Post he was resolutely against any alliance with Khodorkovsky in particular, saying their report showed how the former tycoon was actually battling them while they were investigating the government. “These are Russian oligarchs from the ’90s. They are not the Russian opposition.”

Khodorkovsky, who formed the antiwar committee to bring together the opposition, said that the work of organizations abroad will be vital when a revolutionary leader emerges inside Russia.

“It won’t be me, 60-year-old Khodorkovsky, or British citizen Kara-Murza, or Yulia Navalnaya. It will be a person on the barricades. And if it is barricades, then the experience of the coalition will be needed,” he said, stressing that the work of smaller groups based on consensus and cooperation will prove vital.

Anastasia Burakova, a lawyer who runs the Kovcheg organization, agreed thatthe opposition’s future is among these grassroots activists because they forge connections among groups with more horizontal hierarchies and will be more effective in the long run.

“I would not limit the Russian opposition to a few of the most visible figures; we know of at least 400 different initiatives, from small to fairly big networks, and we cooperate really well with each other, especially when it comes to human rights and media partnerships,” she said.

Burakova said Kovcheg also has a special branch dedicated to preparing a transitional government and democratic reform to put in front of the next leader of Russia.

Several hundred people are weighing in on the legal discussions and proposals prepared by an expert group tasked with drafting future models for Russia’s democratization, she said. The proposals are prepared with the idea that the person who will take over from Putin may very well be someone from inside the system that he created.

Lipman, the analyst, told The Post that what the Russian activists in exile “are good at is building an audience of watchers and listeners among those in Russia who do not like this war.”

Maximova, a blur of energy at 38, is one such individual trying to make a contribution — no matter how small or seemingly futile, she says. Maximova spends her days organizing talks and letter-writing sessions for Russian political prisoners or lobbying British politicians.

She has regular meetings with Ukrainian diplomats and pools resources from her sprawling contact network to try to solve the latest legal case or problem facing Russians in exile.

She is also more optimistic than most.

“There are a lot of talented Russians abroad, people with legitimate wealth. We do have the resources. I am sure this will birth someone who will bring about serious change,” she said.